Cricket: Black Caps in collective stand-off over image rights

New Zealand Cricket (NZC) is heading for a showdown with its players over the signing of World Cup contracts, with cricketers unwilling to sign over personal image and sponsorship rights.

NZC wants players to sign International Cricket Council contracts governing tournaments, sight-unseen.

The issue has delayed the signing of the new collective contract, which has been agreed in principle on every other matter.

The Herald on Sunday has learned NZC wants a clause in the collective contract insisting that players agree in advance to sign participation contracts for ICC-governed events such as the World Cup and Champions Trophy. However, the players are reluctant to sign away rights they say cut across their ability to earn income from personal image and sponsor sources.

There was a stand-off before the event in South Africa in 2003 when Indian players objected to a contract that surrendered their image rights and rights to personal endorsements.

Only an 11th-hour truce saw the Indians sign a participation contract.

India's players accepted tournament contracts conditionally, striking out provisions that said they could not endorse products rivalling the ICC's official sponsors during the World Cup.

The ICC initially said no amended forms would be acceptable but made an exception to ensure India participated in the quadrennial showpiece.

World Cup sponsors then sought damages and the ICC withheld India's World Cup payment, valued at more than $13 million.

The relatively small-budget NZC - with a turnover of about $25 million a year compared to Cricket Australia's $120 million - would be unable to sustain a potential loss of this magnitude.

Both NZC and the New Zealand Cricket Players' Association have agreed not to comment during negotiations for the collective, putting in place a media blackout.

Publicly, both parties are saying the point of contention is unlikely to derail the process, citing the fact that they have both "agreed in the interim to proceed as if the new agreement is fully agreed".

However, the agreement was due to have been signed off on June 1 and is almost two months overdue.

The first tournament in question - the ICC Champions Trophy - is scheduled for India at the start of October, with participation contracts expected to be signed off well in advance of that.

At the heart of the issue is what players consider a restraint of trade.

ICC participation contracts typically say players can't endorse individual sponsors that conflict with tournament sponsors for three months before and three months after the start of a tournament. Players believe the six-month period is costing them potential sponsors.

On the other hand, the ICC would counter that without a family of tournament sponsors, they would not be able to run the tournaments and offer the sort of prize money they do.

The issue of image rights is a perennial battle. The ICC argue it is their tournament and they should be free to promote it in the best light, using the stars' images.

But players believe their image is their personal property.